Records: Prince Edward's A
'The Audit and Rectification of England' What the “Long Parliament” had started, Edward reviewed as the force behind the throne. In particular, while he'd privately reviewed the evidence, he did so publicly – and took the time to summon Lord Latimer and Richard Lyons (Warden of the Mint) from their imprisoned in the Tower of London. In front of Parliament, he took the time to excoriate them for their gross incompetence, willful negligence and breathtaking criminality. With Edward's spotty Sergeants-at-Arms hauling in a host of former officials – the Privy Council of England or their deputies, everyone alive who had served in any sensitive capacity over the last ten years if they were alive and in London. In the Court, they gave testimony and it was recorded for the record. They began with an oath to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help them, God – and much to their own surprise, they did. This often resulted in self-incrimination. The process was, of course, SNS-assisted. Their memories were given jogs when things got hazy – again, SNS-assisted – and testimony ranged from simple timelines to best practices, lessons learned, and almost invariably… misconduct in office, whether simply immoral, professionally unethical or outright criminal. Up for review were appointees of Edward III, Prince Edward's own appointees, John of Gaunt, and even the so-called “Good Parliament.” One thing was certain: given the spectrum of those under inquiry, there was no favoritism one way or another. Depending on transgressions, they were punished according to the law. Many, if not most, were stripped of whatever their rank happened to be, lost their pensions, and in just under half the cases, funds, lands and titles stripped. Many of these joined Lyons in prison, some were executed, some were exiled. It was worth noting that all of them confessed, in detail, gave their motivations (usually petty), and could document specific instances of their wrong-doing. Not one was falsely accused or imprisoned. Several others were pardoned, forgiven, sentenced to probationary measures, or given the chance for restitution if they were contrite and held promise. It otherwise demonstrated that the Court of Audit and Rectification was not an inquisition machine. It was interested in justice and correction, not retribution and retaliation. The effect of quiet justice and new professionalism was a slow-burn surprise to both the Commons that had been disheartened by the corruption in the Royal Council and the corrupt nobility that had been profiting on those processes. 'Crown Prince Edward saved the biggest for last…' After interviewing the appointees of the court, including low and mid-level nobility, Prince Edward called in the Big Dogs. This was the Big Ticket for 1377. Among this crowd were extended Royal Family, including the Prince's own brothers. Traditionally, family is family – and like this family, they were either granted positions and could be powerful allies or they weren’t and attempted to overthrow the king. Family in in this case walked the line between, undermining England for profit. Thomas of Woodstock, Earl of Buckingham, a young 22 years old himself, and married to Eleanor de Bohun (daughter of Richard FitzAlan, 10th Earl of Arundel). His role of Lord High Constable had failed miserably, as already established and reflected in his removal from the position. The Court now heard the evidence against further appointment and was able to see into the process used by Prince Edward to arrive at his conclusions. *''Also revealed was the tutelage of he and his wife to Eleanor’s younger sister, Mary, who was being instructed in religious doctrine. This was being done in the hope that she would enter a convent, thus leaving her share of the considerable Bohun inheritance to Eleanor and Thomas. It was demonstrative of their ethics and motivations.'' Edmund of Langley, Earl of Cambridge, 36 years old, Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports for the last year and leader of English forces in Northern France over the last several years with decidedly mixed success. *His military ability – both leadership and strategy – had been mediocre at best, leading not to decisive victories but rather destroying countryside, galvanizing the French against their English King, and with the Earl of March in an attempt to relieve Brest, instead settled for a truce that ultimately played into the hands of Charles V. *He was relieved of his duties (and stripped of the privileges) of the position of Lord Warden. *He was stripped of his all scattered lands save for Cambridgeshire, upon which he would focus and relearn the art and science of leadership and management. Next, there was John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, Earl of Leicester, Earl of Derby, and recent-former Lord High Steward. Similar to Edmund, John’s military misadventures in France did a great deal against the French countryside, turning the people of France against England, and doing absolutely nothing against the true opponent, Charles V. *His military leadership and strategy was a failure, his ethics were a string of low-level offenses that would get anyone else imprisoned (including improper reporting of tax revenues from his holdings), and his collusion with with Richard FitzAlan, 10th Earl of Arundel, to do the same. *''While Gaunt was not technically impeached from his role of Lord High Steward, he was removed and censured from Court and Parliamentary affairs.'' *But by the grace of God, he was allowed to retain his position as Duke of Lancaster, though was relieved of his titles and lands as Earl of Leicester and Earl of Derby. Finally, there was Richard FitzAlan, Earl of Arundel, Earl of Surrey, who was outraged at the accusations against his father (who had also loaned Edward III great sums of money). *That money had come from the fact that Richard (10th Earl) had been underreporting income in the first place, over-reporting expenses in their extensive military affairs (the medieval English version of the military-industrial complex). The current Richard was currently serving as Admiral of the West and South, and based on the majesty of the Royal Fleet, was doing a very poor job of it. *Not only was the over/underreporting criminal, but doing so at the expense of England's security was technical treason. FitzAlan was stripped of his title of Earl of Surrey, relieved of his naval command, and ordered to return to Arundel while the Crown considered if further steps were appropriate, including possible trail for attainder and imprisonment. While the brother of Prince Edward walked away with their lands intact, their additional titles and roles had been eliminated and they were censured. Combined with similar measures against a variety of lesser nobles and supporting gentry, the Crown Regent had just asserted its power in a very major fashion. The Audit and Rectification went so far beyond the scope of the “Good Parliament” that it would’ve sparked a civil war if the Sergeants-at-Arms didn’t already have the nobility by the throat. Category:Hall of Records Category:1376